Relief/Kristen and Lia Mcintosh/Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Summary
H6513 is a claim bill that provides a special appropriation to compensate Kristen and Lia McIntosh for severe injuries they sustained in a February 12, 2022 collision involving a state-owned vehicle operated by an employee of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The bill recites that the officer crossed Interstate 95 in Nassau County and caused a violent crash with the Thornton-McIntosh family’s vehicle, resulting in catastrophic injuries to Kristen and Lia McIntosh and the officer’s death. The measure is designed to pay damages beyond Florida’s usual sovereign immunity caps because the department acknowledged the injuries likely exceeded the statutory limits and supported the claim bill.
The bill appropriates $2.252 million from the Agricultural Emergency Eradication Trust Fund to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the relief of the two claimants. It directs the Chief Financial Officer to issue warrants of $1.001 million to Kristen McIntosh and $1.251 million to Elizabeth Thornton, as parent and natural guardian of Lia McIntosh, with Lia’s funds to be placed in a trust for her exclusive benefit. The act also states that the amounts paid under the settlement and this bill are intended to be the sole compensation for all present and future claims arising from the incident, and it caps attorney fees at 25 percent of the total award.
The bill’s impact is narrow but significant: it creates a one-time exception to Florida’s sovereign immunity framework by authorizing payment above the standard per-person and per-incident limits in section 768.28, Florida Statutes. It affects the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the state treasury, and the specific injured parties, while not broadly changing general tort law. It also establishes a final settlement structure that resolves all claims tied to the crash.
Sentiment around the bill appears strongly supportive and largely noncontroversial. The department itself supported the claim bill, and the measure passed both the House Civil Justice & Claims Subcommittee and the House Budget Committee unanimously, indicating broad agreement that the injuries were severe and compensation beyond the statutory cap was warranted. The committee history suggests sympathy for the victims and little opposition to the appropriation.
The main point of contention in claim bills of this kind is usually the use of public funds to pay damages above statutory limits, but no specific opposition is reflected in the available record. The bill’s findings emphasize the severity of the injuries, the prior settlement, and the department’s acknowledgment that a much larger verdict was likely, which likely reduced controversy. Any practical concern would center on the size of the payment and the precedent of paying claims from a dedicated trust fund, but the record shows no recorded dissent.
Impact
This bill authorizes a one-time appropriation of $2.252 million from the Agricultural Emergency Eradication Trust Fund to satisfy a claim against the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services arising from a state-employee vehicle crash. It overrides the practical effect of Florida’s sovereign immunity damage caps for this specific incident by directing payment of amounts above the standard limits and by making those payments the exclusive compensation for all related claims. It also requires that the minor child’s award be placed in trust and limits attorney fees to 25 percent of the total award.
Sentiment
The available legislative history indicates strong support and little to no opposition. The bill passed the House Civil Justice & Claims Subcommittee 15-0 and the House Budget Committee 28-0, and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is expressly described as supporting the claim bill. The tone of the bill itself is remedial and sympathetic, focusing on the severity of the injuries and the need to fully compensate the victims.
Contention
The principal issue inherent in the bill is the payment of public funds above Florida’s statutory tort caps, which can raise concerns about sovereign immunity, fiscal impact, and precedent for other claims. In this case, however, those concerns appear muted because the department agreed the injuries far exceeded the cap and supported the bill, and the committees approved it unanimously. No specific opposing arguments or disputed testimony are reflected in the provided record.